At 07:56 PM 7/16/2003 -0700, khmiska wrote:
>Gentlemen,
>My dry "darkroom" consists of Photoshop 7, a Canon S900 printer and an
>Epson 2400 scanner. I shot some K'chrome 64 with my M2 and a
>Voigtländer 21/4.
>
>I learned a valuable lesson. I scanned the 'chromes in at 400 dpi and
>printed them at 400 dpi as 8 x 10s. What a disappointment. Then the
>proverbial light bulb went on over my cranium and I rescanned the
>slides at 1200 dpi and printed them at 400 dpi. The difference is
>marked.
? 400 dpi scanning? Wheee...
To do "serious" work, you should get a negative scanner. They have come
down in price so you can get a good one for under $400, I think. I
personally use a Nikon LS-4000 but I heard the Canon FS4000 and the new
Minolta is as good in most areas for a lot less.
>Question - should I scan at still higher resolution? If so, what res?
Scan it at the highest resolution you can, on a negative scanner. On a
flatbed, I think higher than certain amount, it is interpolating it anyway,
so there is no need to do so.
>Should I print at a higher res? If so what?
I think the conventional wisdom is to print at 300 dpi, and there is no
need to go any higher. I used to print at 360dpi to match the multiple of
the printer resolution, but I don't see any difference. There is minimal
gain to be have to print at 720 / 1440 /2880 on the newer printers.
Good luck!
// richard <http://www.imagecraft.com>
<http://www.dragonsgate.net/mailman/listinfo>
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html